简介：我在C＃中编写高性能代码。是的，我知道C ++会给我更好的优化，但我仍然选择使用C＃。我不想辩论这个选择。相反，我想听听那些像我一样试图在.NET Framework上编写高性能代码的人。
问题：
我想我知道： 原始的.NET JIT编译器不会内联涉及结构的任何内容。奇怪的给定结构只应该用于需要像内置函数那样优化的小值类型的情况，但是确实如此。幸运的是，在.NET 3.5SP1和.NET 2.0SP2中，他们对JIT Optimizer进行了一些改进，包括对内联的改进，特别是对于结构。 （我猜他们这样做是因为否则他们引入的新的Complex结构会表现得非常糟糕......所以复杂团队可能会对JIT Optimizer团队产生影响。）因此，.NET 3.5 SP1之前的任何文档都可能是与这个问题不太相关。
我的测试结果显示： 我已经通过检查C：\ Windows \ Microsoft.NET \ Framework \ v2.0.50727 \ mscorwks.dll文件是否具有版本＆gt; = 3053来验证我有更新的JIT优化器，因此应该对JIT优化器进行那些改进。然而，即便如此，我的时间和反汇编的显示都是：
用于传递带有两个双精度的结构的JIT生成的代码远没有直接传递两个双精度的代码有效。
对于struct方法，JIT生成的代码传递'this'远比将struct作为参数传递更有效。
如果你传递两个双打而不是传递一个带有两个双精度的结构，JIT仍会更好地内联，即使是由于明显处于循环中的乘数也是如此。
时间： 实际上，在查看反汇编时，我意识到循环中的大部分时间只是从List中访问测试数据。如果分解循环的开销代码和访问数据，则进行相同调用的四种方法之间的差异会大不相同。对于PlusEqual（double，double）而不是PlusEqual（Element），我可以获得5倍到20倍的加速比。使用PlusEqual（double，double）代替运算符+ = 10x到40x。哇。悲伤。
这是一组时间：
Populating List<Element> took 320ms.
The PlusEqual() method took 105ms.
The 'same' += operator took 131ms.
The 'same' -= operator took 139ms.
The PlusEqual(double, double) method took 68ms.
The do nothing loop took 66ms.
The ratio of operator with constructor to method is 124%.
The ratio of operator without constructor to method is 132%.
The ratio of PlusEqual(double,double) to PlusEqual(Element) is 64%.
If we remove the overhead time for the loop accessing the elements from the List...
The ratio of operator with constructor to method is 166%.
The ratio of operator without constructor to method is 187%.
The ratio of PlusEqual(double,double) to PlusEqual(Element) is 5%.
守则：
namespace OperatorVsMethod
{
public struct Element
{
public double Left;
public double Right;
public Element(double left, double right)
{
this.Left = left;
this.Right = right;
}
public static Element operator +(Element x, Element y)
{
return new Element(x.Left + y.Left, x.Right + y.Right);
}
public static Element operator -(Element x, Element y)
{
x.Left += y.Left;
x.Right += y.Right;
return x;
}
/// <summary>
/// Like the += operator; but faster.
/// </summary>
public void PlusEqual(Element that)
{
this.Left += that.Left;
this.Right += that.Right;
}
/// <summary>
/// Like the += operator; but faster.
/// </summary>
public void PlusEqual(double thatLeft, double thatRight)
{
this.Left += thatLeft;
this.Right += thatRight;
}
}
[TestClass]
public class UnitTest1
{
[TestMethod]
public void TestMethod1()
{
Stopwatch stopwatch = new Stopwatch();
// Populate a List of Elements to multiply together
int seedSize = 4;
List<double> doubles = new List<double>(seedSize);
doubles.Add(2.5d);
doubles.Add(100000d);
doubles.Add(-0.5d);
doubles.Add(-100002d);
int size = 2500000 * seedSize;
List<Element> elts = new List<Element>(size);
stopwatch.Reset();
stopwatch.Start();
for (int ii = 0; ii < size; ++ii)
{
int di = ii % seedSize;
double d = doubles[di];
elts.Add(new Element(d, d));
}
stopwatch.Stop();
long populateMS = stopwatch.ElapsedMilliseconds;
// Measure speed of += operator (calls ctor)
Element operatorCtorResult = new Element(1d, 1d);
stopwatch.Reset();
stopwatch.Start();
for (int ii = 0; ii < size; ++ii)
{
operatorCtorResult += elts[ii];
}
stopwatch.Stop();
long operatorCtorMS = stopwatch.ElapsedMilliseconds;
// Measure speed of -= operator (+= without ctor)
Element operatorNoCtorResult = new Element(1d, 1d);
stopwatch.Reset();
stopwatch.Start();
for (int ii = 0; ii < size; ++ii)
{
operatorNoCtorResult -= elts[ii];
}
stopwatch.Stop();
long operatorNoCtorMS = stopwatch.ElapsedMilliseconds;
// Measure speed of PlusEqual(Element) method
Element plusEqualResult = new Element(1d, 1d);
stopwatch.Reset();
stopwatch.Start();
for (int ii = 0; ii < size; ++ii)
{
plusEqualResult.PlusEqual(elts[ii]);
}
stopwatch.Stop();
long plusEqualMS = stopwatch.ElapsedMilliseconds;
// Measure speed of PlusEqual(double, double) method
Element plusEqualDDResult = new Element(1d, 1d);
stopwatch.Reset();
stopwatch.Start();
for (int ii = 0; ii < size; ++ii)
{
Element elt = elts[ii];
plusEqualDDResult.PlusEqual(elt.Left, elt.Right);
}
stopwatch.Stop();
long plusEqualDDMS = stopwatch.ElapsedMilliseconds;
// Measure speed of doing nothing but accessing the Element
Element doNothingResult = new Element(1d, 1d);
stopwatch.Reset();
stopwatch.Start();
for (int ii = 0; ii < size; ++ii)
{
Element elt = elts[ii];
double left = elt.Left;
double right = elt.Right;
}
stopwatch.Stop();
long doNothingMS = stopwatch.ElapsedMilliseconds;
// Report results
Assert.AreEqual(1d, operatorCtorResult.Left, "The operator += did not compute the right result!");
Assert.AreEqual(1d, operatorNoCtorResult.Left, "The operator += did not compute the right result!");
Assert.AreEqual(1d, plusEqualResult.Left, "The operator += did not compute the right result!");
Assert.AreEqual(1d, plusEqualDDResult.Left, "The operator += did not compute the right result!");
Assert.AreEqual(1d, doNothingResult.Left, "The operator += did not compute the right result!");
// Report speeds
Console.WriteLine("Populating List<Element> took {0}ms.", populateMS);
Console.WriteLine("The PlusEqual() method took {0}ms.", plusEqualMS);
Console.WriteLine("The 'same' += operator took {0}ms.", operatorCtorMS);
Console.WriteLine("The 'same' -= operator took {0}ms.", operatorNoCtorMS);
Console.WriteLine("The PlusEqual(double, double) method took {0}ms.", plusEqualDDMS);
Console.WriteLine("The do nothing loop took {0}ms.", doNothingMS);
// Compare speeds
long percentageRatio = 100L * operatorCtorMS / plusEqualMS;
Console.WriteLine("The ratio of operator with constructor to method is {0}%.", percentageRatio);
percentageRatio = 100L * operatorNoCtorMS / plusEqualMS;
Console.WriteLine("The ratio of operator without constructor to method is {0}%.", percentageRatio);
percentageRatio = 100L * plusEqualDDMS / plusEqualMS;
Console.WriteLine("The ratio of PlusEqual(double,double) to PlusEqual(Element) is {0}%.", percentageRatio);
operatorCtorMS -= doNothingMS;
operatorNoCtorMS -= doNothingMS;
plusEqualMS -= doNothingMS;
plusEqualDDMS -= doNothingMS;
Console.WriteLine("If we remove the overhead time for the loop accessing the elements from the List...");
percentageRatio = 100L * operatorCtorMS / plusEqualMS;
Console.WriteLine("The ratio of operator with constructor to method is {0}%.", percentageRatio);
percentageRatio = 100L * operatorNoCtorMS / plusEqualMS;
Console.WriteLine("The ratio of operator without constructor to method is {0}%.", percentageRatio);
percentageRatio = 100L * plusEqualDDMS / plusEqualMS;
Console.WriteLine("The ratio of PlusEqual(double,double) to PlusEqual(Element) is {0}%.", percentageRatio);
}
}
}
IL：（也就是上面编译的内容）
public void PlusEqual(Element that)
{
00000000 push ebp
00000001 mov ebp,esp
00000003 push edi
00000004 push esi
00000005 push ebx
00000006 sub esp,30h
00000009 xor eax,eax
0000000b mov dword ptr [ebp-10h],eax
0000000e xor eax,eax
00000010 mov dword ptr [ebp-1Ch],eax
00000013 mov dword ptr [ebp-3Ch],ecx
00000016 cmp dword ptr ds:[04C87B7Ch],0
0000001d je 00000024
0000001f call 753081B1
00000024 nop
this.Left += that.Left;
00000025 mov eax,dword ptr [ebp-3Ch]
00000028 fld qword ptr [ebp+8]
0000002b fadd qword ptr [eax]
0000002d fstp qword ptr [eax]
this.Right += that.Right;
0000002f mov eax,dword ptr [ebp-3Ch]
00000032 fld qword ptr [ebp+10h]
00000035 fadd qword ptr [eax+8]
00000038 fstp qword ptr [eax+8]
}
0000003b nop
0000003c lea esp,[ebp-0Ch]
0000003f pop ebx
00000040 pop esi
00000041 pop edi
00000042 pop ebp
00000043 ret 10h
public void PlusEqual(double thatLeft, double thatRight)
{
00000000 push ebp
00000001 mov ebp,esp
00000003 push edi
00000004 push esi
00000005 push ebx
00000006 sub esp,30h
00000009 xor eax,eax
0000000b mov dword ptr [ebp-10h],eax
0000000e xor eax,eax
00000010 mov dword ptr [ebp-1Ch],eax
00000013 mov dword ptr [ebp-3Ch],ecx
00000016 cmp dword ptr ds:[04C87B7Ch],0
0000001d je 00000024
0000001f call 75308159
00000024 nop
this.Left += thatLeft;
00000025 mov eax,dword ptr [ebp-3Ch]
00000028 fld qword ptr [ebp+10h]
0000002b fadd qword ptr [eax]
0000002d fstp qword ptr [eax]
this.Right += thatRight;
0000002f mov eax,dword ptr [ebp-3Ch]
00000032 fld qword ptr [ebp+8]
00000035 fadd qword ptr [eax+8]
00000038 fstp qword ptr [eax+8]
}
0000003b nop
0000003c lea esp,[ebp-0Ch]
0000003f pop ebx
00000040 pop esi
00000041 pop edi
00000042 pop ebp
00000043 ret 10h
答案 0 :(得分：9)
我得到了非常不同的结果，更不那么戏剧化了。但是没有使用测试运行器，我将代码粘贴到控制台模式应用程序中。在32位模式下，5％的结果是~87％，在我尝试时，在64位模式下的结果是~100％。
对齐对于双精度至关重要，.NET运行时只能承诺在32位机器上对齐4。在我看来，测试运行器正在启动测试方法，其堆栈地址与4而不是8对齐。当双重超过缓存行边界时，错位惩罚会变得非常大。
答案 1 :(得分：5)
我在复制你的结果时遇到了一些困难。
我拿了你的代码：
当我这样做时，我得到了以下与你的时间大不相同的时间。 为避免疑义，我将准确发布我使用的代码。
这是我的时间
Populating List<Element> took 527ms.
The PlusEqual() method took 450ms.
The 'same' += operator took 386ms.
The 'same' -= operator took 446ms.
The PlusEqual(double, double) method took 413ms.
The do nothing loop took 229ms.
The ratio of operator with constructor to method is 85%.
The ratio of operator without constructor to method is 99%.
The ratio of PlusEqual(double,double) to PlusEqual(Element) is 91%.
If we remove the overhead time for the loop accessing the elements from the List...
The ratio of operator with constructor to method is 71%.
The ratio of operator without constructor to method is 98%.
The ratio of PlusEqual(double,double) to PlusEqual(Element) is 83%.
这些是我对您的代码的编辑：
namespace OperatorVsMethod
{
public struct Element
{
public double Left;
public double Right;
public Element(double left, double right)
{
this.Left = left;
this.Right = right;
}
public static Element operator +(Element x, Element y)
{
return new Element(x.Left + y.Left, x.Right + y.Right);
}
public static Element operator -(Element x, Element y)
{
x.Left += y.Left;
x.Right += y.Right;
return x;
}
/// <summary>
/// Like the += operator; but faster.
/// </summary>
public void PlusEqual(Element that)
{
this.Left += that.Left;
this.Right += that.Right;
}
/// <summary>
/// Like the += operator; but faster.
/// </summary>
public void PlusEqual(double thatLeft, double thatRight)
{
this.Left += thatLeft;
this.Right += thatRight;
}
}
public class UnitTest1
{
public static void Main()
{
Stopwatch stopwatch = new Stopwatch();
// Populate a List of Elements to multiply together
int seedSize = 4;
List<double> doubles = new List<double>(seedSize);
doubles.Add(2.5d);
doubles.Add(100000d);
doubles.Add(-0.5d);
doubles.Add(-100002d);
int size = 10000000 * seedSize;
List<Element> elts = new List<Element>(size);
stopwatch.Reset();
stopwatch.Start();
for (int ii = 0; ii < size; ++ii)
{
int di = ii % seedSize;
double d = doubles[di];
elts.Add(new Element(d, d));
}
stopwatch.Stop();
long populateMS = stopwatch.ElapsedMilliseconds;
// Measure speed of += operator (calls ctor)
Element operatorCtorResult = new Element(1d, 1d);
stopwatch.Reset();
stopwatch.Start();
for (int ii = 0; ii < size; ++ii)
{
operatorCtorResult += elts[ii];
}
stopwatch.Stop();
long operatorCtorMS = stopwatch.ElapsedMilliseconds;
// Measure speed of -= operator (+= without ctor)
Element operatorNoCtorResult = new Element(1d, 1d);
stopwatch.Reset();
stopwatch.Start();
for (int ii = 0; ii < size; ++ii)
{
operatorNoCtorResult -= elts[ii];
}
stopwatch.Stop();
long operatorNoCtorMS = stopwatch.ElapsedMilliseconds;
// Measure speed of PlusEqual(Element) method
Element plusEqualResult = new Element(1d, 1d);
stopwatch.Reset();
stopwatch.Start();
for (int ii = 0; ii < size; ++ii)
{
plusEqualResult.PlusEqual(elts[ii]);
}
stopwatch.Stop();
long plusEqualMS = stopwatch.ElapsedMilliseconds;
// Measure speed of PlusEqual(double, double) method
Element plusEqualDDResult = new Element(1d, 1d);
stopwatch.Reset();
stopwatch.Start();
for (int ii = 0; ii < size; ++ii)
{
Element elt = elts[ii];
plusEqualDDResult.PlusEqual(elt.Left, elt.Right);
}
stopwatch.Stop();
long plusEqualDDMS = stopwatch.ElapsedMilliseconds;
// Measure speed of doing nothing but accessing the Element
Element doNothingResult = new Element(1d, 1d);
stopwatch.Reset();
stopwatch.Start();
for (int ii = 0; ii < size; ++ii)
{
Element elt = elts[ii];
double left = elt.Left;
double right = elt.Right;
}
stopwatch.Stop();
long doNothingMS = stopwatch.ElapsedMilliseconds;
// Report speeds
Console.WriteLine("Populating List<Element> took {0}ms.", populateMS);
Console.WriteLine("The PlusEqual() method took {0}ms.", plusEqualMS);
Console.WriteLine("The 'same' += operator took {0}ms.", operatorCtorMS);
Console.WriteLine("The 'same' -= operator took {0}ms.", operatorNoCtorMS);
Console.WriteLine("The PlusEqual(double, double) method took {0}ms.", plusEqualDDMS);
Console.WriteLine("The do nothing loop took {0}ms.", doNothingMS);
// Compare speeds
long percentageRatio = 100L * operatorCtorMS / plusEqualMS;
Console.WriteLine("The ratio of operator with constructor to method is {0}%.", percentageRatio);
percentageRatio = 100L * operatorNoCtorMS / plusEqualMS;
Console.WriteLine("The ratio of operator without constructor to method is {0}%.", percentageRatio);
percentageRatio = 100L * plusEqualDDMS / plusEqualMS;
Console.WriteLine("The ratio of PlusEqual(double,double) to PlusEqual(Element) is {0}%.", percentageRatio);
operatorCtorMS -= doNothingMS;
operatorNoCtorMS -= doNothingMS;
plusEqualMS -= doNothingMS;
plusEqualDDMS -= doNothingMS;
Console.WriteLine("If we remove the overhead time for the loop accessing the elements from the List...");
percentageRatio = 100L * operatorCtorMS / plusEqualMS;
Console.WriteLine("The ratio of operator with constructor to method is {0}%.", percentageRatio);
percentageRatio = 100L * operatorNoCtorMS / plusEqualMS;
Console.WriteLine("The ratio of operator without constructor to method is {0}%.", percentageRatio);
percentageRatio = 100L * plusEqualDDMS / plusEqualMS;
Console.WriteLine("The ratio of PlusEqual(double,double) to PlusEqual(Element) is {0}%.", percentageRatio);
}
}
}
答案 2 :(得分：3)
在这里运行.NET 4.0。我用“Any CPU”编译，在发布模式下面向.NET 4.0。执行来自命令行。它以64位模式运行。我的时间有点不同。
Populating List<Element> took 442ms.
The PlusEqual() method took 115ms.
The 'same' += operator took 201ms.
The 'same' -= operator took 200ms.
The PlusEqual(double, double) method took 129ms.
The do nothing loop took 93ms.
The ratio of operator with constructor to method is 174%.
The ratio of operator without constructor to method is 173%.
The ratio of PlusEqual(double,double) to PlusEqual(Element) is 112%.
If we remove the overhead time for the loop accessing the elements from the List
...
The ratio of operator with constructor to method is 490%.
The ratio of operator without constructor to method is 486%.
The ratio of PlusEqual(double,double) to PlusEqual(Element) is 163%.
特别是，PlusEqual(Element)略快于PlusEqual(double, double)。
无论.NET 3.5中存在什么问题，它似乎都不存在于.NET 4.0中。
答案 3 :(得分：2)
与@Corey Kosak一样，我只是在发布模式下将此代码作为简单的控制台应用程序在VS 2010 Express中运行。我的数字非常不同。但我也有Fx4.5所以这些可能不是干净的Fx4.0的结果。
Populating List<Element> took 435ms.
The PlusEqual() method took 109ms.
The 'same' += operator took 217ms.
The 'same' -= operator took 157ms.
The PlusEqual(double, double) method took 118ms.
The do nothing loop took 79ms.
The ratio of operator with constructor to method is 199%.
The ratio of operator without constructor to method is 144%.
The ratio of PlusEqual(double,double) to PlusEqual(Element) is 108%.
If we remove the overhead time for the loop accessing the elements from the List
...
The ratio of operator with constructor to method is 460%.
The ratio of operator without constructor to method is 260%.
The ratio of PlusEqual(double,double) to PlusEqual(Element) is 130%.
编辑：现在从cmd行开始运行。这确实有所作为，而且数字的变化较小。
答案 4 :(得分：1)
不确定这是否相关，但这是Windows 7 64位上.NET 4.0 64位的数字。我的mscorwks.dll版本是2.0.50727.5446。我只是将代码粘贴到LINQPad中并从那里运行它。结果如下：
Populating List<Element> took 496ms.
The PlusEqual() method took 189ms.
The 'same' += operator took 295ms.
The 'same' -= operator took 358ms.
The PlusEqual(double, double) method took 148ms.
The do nothing loop took 103ms.
The ratio of operator with constructor to method is 156%.
The ratio of operator without constructor to method is 189%.
The ratio of PlusEqual(double,double) to PlusEqual(Element) is 78%.
If we remove the overhead time for the loop accessing the elements from the List
...
The ratio of operator with constructor to method is 223%.
The ratio of operator without constructor to method is 296%.
The ratio of PlusEqual(double,double) to PlusEqual(Element) is 52%.
答案 5 :(得分：1)
除了在其他答案中提到的JIT编译器差异之外，struct方法调用和struct运算符之间的另一个区别是struct方法调用将this作为ref参数传递（并且可能是写入接受其他参数作为ref参数），而struct运算符将按值传递所有操作数。无论结构有多大，将任何大小的结构作为ref参数传递的成本都是固定的，而传递较大结构的成本与结构大小成正比。使用大型结构（甚至数百个字节）没有任何问题，如果可以避免不必要地复制它们;虽然使用方法时通常可以防止不必要的副本，但在使用运算符时无法阻止它们。
答案 6 :(得分：0)
我想象当你访问结构的成员时，它实际上正在做一个额外的操作来访问成员，THIS指针+偏移量。
答案 7 :(得分：0)
可以使用double []和“众所周知的”偏移量和索引增量来代替List吗？